| Present: | R. Bishop, B. Bonacci, R. Daluge, C. Dillhunt, S. Ingham, K. Forest, B. Holden, J. Iyer, B. Jensen, F. Kooistra, J. Mather, E. Maurer, K. Nielsen, M. Theis, J. vanHooke, S. Werner, M. Westler, B. Wilson, R. Wolkowski, and T. Wright. |
Meeting was called to order by S. Ingham at 10:05 a.m.
Since this was a joint meeting of the CASI and the Equity and Diversity Committee, introductions were made.
The agenda was distributed. There were no comments or additions.
Mission statements from both Committees were distributed.
S. Ingham said that the EDC is responsible for a whole grab bag of issues. This year they are focusing on 1) ADA compliance, 2) gender climate survey, and 3) gender equity in terms of salary. This committee also deals with personnel issues relating to gender equity.
Frank Kooistra said that establishment of a CASI in each school/college was mandated by Campus in the spring of 1999. Each unit had the opportunity to set their own guidelines. There are 13 academic staff on the Committee. Ten are elected from six wards and the seventh ward consists of three individuals appointed by the Dean. The Dean has appointed F. Kooistra as his designee to chair the Committee and tries to meet with the Committee twice each year. F. Kooistra handed out the Committee's purpose and responsibilities. They advise the Dean on matters affecting academic staff. CASI is involved with climate, performance evaluations, personnel issues, equity and fairness, and gender issues related to salary.
A question was raised about climate. B. Holden talked about the survey that was done last year. There were questions about job satisfaction, collegial environment, advancement, and job development. It was skewed toward people who had been here longer. A summary of the survey will be on the web site. Someone asked if there were any open-ended questions. B. Holden responded that there were a few. The survey indicated that there was no significant difference between male and female responses.
S. Ingham said that if anyone thinks of a mutual area or concern about which committee does what, they should be contact F. Kooistra or him. The Equity and Diversity Committee tends to be more faculty oriented and CASI is more academic staff oriented. CASI can only make recommendations to the Dean. In the future, maybe they can work through Equity and Diversity to institute policy.
Performance evaluations were discussed. The Personnel Procedures and Compensation Subcommittee recommended a new process for those departments that don't have a current performance evaluation process. They don't want to change anything that is already working. They have developed a list of items that should be included on performance evaluations. Dean Aberle has brought this up with the department chairs. Human Resources designed the format for departments that don't currently have one. It is on the HR web page. The annual merit/budget meetings will begin next week. The Deans will review the departments' performance review process for faculty and academic staff.
S. Ingham distributed and reviewed the report. Category A & B were included in the survey and the response rate was good. It was suggested that postdocs and graduate students be included in the next survey. E. Maurer suggested using both percentages and dollar amounts in the report. S. Ingham asked the committees for help with the recommendation section. E. Maurer suggested that the committee call a group together with an open forum format to get solutions to issues that were raised in the survey. There was discussion on whether this would work because of confidentiality and the willingness of people to come forward. Some felt that women who have been on campus for more than ten years would be more confident, have a vested interest in the campus, and be more willing to make recommendations. R. Bishop suggested that a task force should follow up on these recommendations. S. Ingham will work on another draft report and send it to both committees to review. F. Kooistra suggested sending the current draft to Dean Aberle so there aren't further delays.
S. Ingham asked everyone to let either Frank Kooistra or him know if this was a good meeting or a bad one and how many times a year the two committees should get together.
T. Wright said it is important for employees to be aware of policies regarding sexual harassment and asked if there would be more sexual harassment sessions. F. Kooistra agreed that these policies need to be communicated and said that many of the policies are on the web and many are unwritten. He said the sexual harassment training sessions were an attempt by Campus to energize awareness on campus. This issue had been dormant for a number of years. This ought to be a continuing effort and training sessions should be scheduled for new employees. E. Maurer asked if we had a list of individuals who attended the earlier sessions. They were entered on a database but there were instances where individuals didn't sign in or where signatures were illegible.
B. Jensen suggested that the two committees meet outside of regular committee meeting time so issues are not delayed.
Meeting was adjourned at 11:20 a.m.
Submitted 2/21/02
J. Simons